exHarmony: Authorship and Citations for Benchmarking the Reviewer Assignment Problem
The peer review process is crucial for ensuring the quality and reliability of scholarly work, yet assigning suitable reviewers remains a significant challenge. Traditional manual methods are labor-intensive and often ineffective, leading to nonconstructive or biased reviews. This paper introduces the exHarmony (eHarmony but for connecting experts to manuscripts) benchmark, designed to address these challenges by re-imagining the Reviewer Assignment Problem (RAP) as a retrieval task. Utilizing the extensive data from OpenAlex, we propose a novel approach that considers a host of signals from the authors, most similar experts, and the citation relations as potential indicators for a suitable reviewer for a manuscript. This approach allows us to develop a standard benchmark dataset for evaluating the reviewer assignment problem without needing explicit labels. We benchmark various methods, including traditional lexical matching, static neural embeddings, and contextualized neural embeddings, and introduce evaluation metrics that assess both relevance and diversity in the context of RAP. Our results indicate that while traditional methods perform reasonably well, contextualized embeddings trained on scholarly literature show the best performance. The findings underscore the importance of further research to enhance the diversity and effectiveness of reviewer assignments.
Code (1)
Tasks
BenchmarkingDiversitySimilar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
On Strategyproof Conference Peer Review
We consider peer review in a conference setting where there is typically an overlap between the set of reviewers and the set of authors. This overlap can incentivize strategic reviews to influence the final ranking of on…
Recommending Missed Citations Identified by Reviewers: A New Task, Dataset and Baselines
Citing comprehensively and appropriately has become a challenging task with the explosive growth of scientific publications. Current citation recommendation systems aim to recommend a list of scientific papers for a give…
Citation RecommendationRecommendation SystemsNo more Reviewer #2: Subverting Automatic Paper-Reviewer Assignment using Adversarial Learning
The number of papers submitted to academic conferences is steadily rising in many scientific disciplines. To handle this growth, systems for automatic paper-reviewer assignments are increasingly used during the reviewing…
Topic ModelsMitigating Manipulation in Peer Review via Randomized Reviewer Assignments
We consider three important challenges in conference peer review: (i) reviewers maliciously attempting to get assigned to certain papers to provide positive reviews, possibly as part of quid-pro-quo arrangements with the…
Reviewer Assignment Problem: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Appropriate reviewer assignment significantly impacts the quality of proposal evaluation, as accurate and fair reviews are contingent on their assignment to relevant reviewers. The crucial task of assigning reviewers to …
Survey